KSTKBAX  (ilL  BORCJKS 
IJ,.  I).  (jKOUC.KI OWN,  1921 
MIMS'I  KR  ()|.  lOKl  .KIN  K l  .l  .A'I'IONS  ()|.  VKM  /.UKI.A 


_O-l096 


(gparg^totun  Inm^rBity 

SCHOOL  OF  FOREIGN  SERVICE 


DEDICATED 

TO 


IPa«  Ampriran  Snitg 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


https://archive.org/details/academicexercise1921geor 


ACADEMIC  EXERCISES  IN  GASTON  HALL 
GEORGETOWN  UNIVERSITY 
ON  THE  OCCASION  OF  THE  CONFERRING  OF  THE  DEGREE  OF 

Snrtnr  nf  Earns 

ON 

iEfil^ban  (BM 

MINISTER  OF  FOREIGN  RELATIONS  OF  VENEZUELA 
APRIL  26,  1921 


'HE  sojourn  in  the  United  States  of  the  special  delegation  from 
Venezuela  to  the  unveiling  of  the  statue  of  Simon  Bolivar  in 
/  ^  ^  Central  Park,  New  York,  was  notable  in  many  respects.  Few 

representatives  of  foreign  nations, — and  we  have  seen  many 
in  recent  years, — have  been  accorded  a  more  enthusiastic  or 
more  elaborate  welcome  than  that  tendered  to  Senor  Esteban 
Gil  Borges,  Minister  of  Foreign  Relations  of  Venezuela  during  his  stay  in  the 
United  States  as  official  spokesman  of  the  land  first  set  free  by  the  Liberator  of 
South  America. 

Headed  by  President  Harding  and  Secretary  of  State  Hughes,  a  large  group 
of  prominent  Government  Officials  and  Washingtonians  journeyed  to  New  York 
in  a  special  train  on  April  19th  to  attend  the  unveiling  exercises  and  to  hear  the 
President  of  the  United  States  deliver  a  stirring  address  in  which  he  pledged 
anew  to  the  Republics  of  Latin  America  the  disinterested  friendship  of  the  United 
States  and  urged  upon  both  peoples  renewed  devotion  to  the  common  ideals  of 
Washington  and  Bolivar. 

The  President  of  Georgetown  University,  John  B.  Creeden,  and  the  Regent 
of  the  School  of  Foreign  Service,  Edmund  A.  Walsh,  were  among  the  special 
guests  invited  to  New  York  by  the  Venezuelan  Government  to  participate  in  the 
impressive  unveiling  ceremonies.  While  in  New  York,  the  President  of  George¬ 
town  conveyed  to  the  Minister  of  Foreign  Relations  of  Venezuela  formal  noti¬ 
fication  that  the  School  of  Foreign  Service  had  petitioned  the  academic  senate 
of  the  University  that  the  Honorary  degree  of  Doctor  of  Laws  should  be  con¬ 
ferred  upon  him.  This  petition,  he  was  happy  to  announce,  had  been  favorably 
voted  upon  and,  he  added,  he  deemed  it  particularly  fitting  that  the  first  candidate 
to  be  presented  for  academic  honors  by  the  new  School  of  Foreign  Service 
should  be  a  distinguished  statesman,  scholar  and  educator  from  a  sister  republic 
of  South  America. 


SCHOOL  OF  FOREIGN  SERVICE 


A  brilliant  gathering  of  foreign  diplomats,  Government  officials,  educators 
and  citizens  of  Washington  assembled  in  Gaston  Hall  on  the  evening  of  April 
26th  to  assist  at  the  academic  exercises  in  honor  of  Venezuela.  Gaston  Hall, 
always  impressive  by  reason  of  its  classic  mural  decorations,  was  particularly 
warm  and  bright  with  the  inter-twined  colors  of  the  twenty-one  American  Re¬ 
publics.  When  the  long  procession,  headed  by  the  President  of  the  University, 
who  escorted  Dr.  Santos  Dominici,  the  Minister  from  Venezuela  to  the  United 
States,  and  comprising  the  members  of  the  various  faculties  in  cap  and  gowns, 
and  invited  guests  from  the  embassies  and  legations,  had  reached  the  stage,  a 
special  convocation  of  the  University  was  opened  with  an  address  of  welcome 
by  Edmund  A.  Walsh,  Regent  of  the  School  of  Foreign  Service. 


ADDRESS  OF  WELCOME 

By  Edmund  A.  Walsh,  S.J., 

Regent  of  the  School  of  Foreign  Service,  Georgetown  University. 

Reverend  President  of  the  University,  Honored  Representatives  from  Venezuela, 
Dr.  Borges  and  Colleagues,  Distinguished  Guests,  Members  of  the  Faculty  of 
Georgctozvn  University,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen: 


OMETHING  less  than  two  years  ago,  in  this  same  hall,  under 
auspices  not  unlike  those  which  have  brought  together  this 
distinguished  assemblage,  the  School  of  Foreign  Service  was 
welcomed  as  a  distinct  department  of  Georgetown  University 
and  was  bid  Godspeed  by  the  older  faculties  in  its  mission  of 
preparing  chosen  American  youths  for  the  responsible  duties 
devolving  upon  those  who  aspire  to  represent  this  nation  abroad,  be  it  in  a 
public  or  private  capacity.  Among  the  earnest  recommendations  made  on  that 
occasion  by  the  eminent  scholars  and  statesmen  who  assisted  at  the  inauguration 
exercises,  was  the  hope  that  the  technical  instruction,  while  based  upon  and 
pre-supposing  the  solid  substance  of  a  liberal  education,  should  be  eminently 
practical  and,  as  far  as  possible,  of  the  laboratory  type.  Long  and  bitter  experi¬ 
ence  had  taught  these  observant  men  that  proficiency  in  the  technique  of  Foreign 
Trade  or  Consular  Practice  or  Diplomatic  Procedure  is  but  a  fractional  part  of 
the  full  equipment  required  of  youths  embarking  on  the  high  romance  of 
International  Relations. 


Technical  knowledge  will  be  futile,  nay,  even  dangerous  in  proportion  as  it 
is  insular,  unless  humanized  by  a  broad  sympathy  with  the  men,  the  history,  the 


ESTEBAN  GIL  BORGES 


literature  and  social  institutions  of  other  climes.  It  was  in  answer  to  this  oft- 
repeated  hope,  and  as  a  practical  exemplification  of  Articles  14,  15,  16,  18  and  19 
of  the  Final  Act  of  the  Pan  American  Scientific  Congress  held  in  this  city  in 
1915,  that  it  was  decided  to  send  a  group  of  Foreign  Service  students  to  some 
one  of  the  Latin  American  Republics  in  the  summer  of  1920,  under  the  direction 
of  our  devoted  and  esteemed  Professor  of  Spanish,  Dr.  Sherwell,  himself  a 
perfect  blend  of  Latin  culture  and  northern  energy,  the  true  Pan-American. 

The  perfect  legal  equality  of  nations,  so  clearly  defined  by  that  illustrious 
interpreter  of  our  Constitution,  Chief  Justice  Marshall,  in  the  “Antelope  Case” 
in  1825,  is  a  first  principle  of  social  intercourse  in  the  School  of  Foreign  Service. 
We  were  perplexed,  therefore,  and  embarrassed  to  no  small  degree  in  choosing 
the  country  to  which  our  first  expedition  for  economic  research  should  be  sent. 
Upon  mature  deliberation,  however,  we  felt  that  no  happier  selection  could  be 
made  as  the  starting  point  for  such  student  expeditions,  which  ultimately  will 
cover  all  the  Latin  American  Republics,  than  the  most  accessible  country  of  the 
Southern  Continent,  the  birthplace  of  the  great  Liberator,  Simon  Bolivar,  the 
land  especially  bound  to  the  United  States  by  ties  traditionally  cordial  and 
particularly  strong  since  certain  events  recorded  in  the  Diplomatic  History  of 
both  countries  under  the  year  1895, — the  Republic  of  Venezuela! 

The  rich  results  of  the  sojourn  of  these  eighteen  Georgetown  students  in 
the  land  of  Venezuela  are  now  matter  of  common  knowledge  and  the  subject 
of  wide  comment.  The  printed  report  shows  how  great  was  the  courtesy  and 
how  extensive  were  the  facilities  afforded  the  Georgetown  students  by  the  official 
and  academic  authorities  of  Venezuela.  In  welcoming  you,  therefore,  to  the 
halls  of  Georgetown  University,  halls  made  illustrious  in  olden  days  by  the 
visit  of  the  Liberator  of  our  Country,  the  immortal  Washington,  I  beg  to  express 
to  the  Minister  of  Foreign  Relations  of  Venezuela  and  through  him  to  the  people 
of  his  country,  the  sincere  gratitude  of  our  University,  and,  for  that  matter,  of 
all  academic  circles  in  this  country,  for  the  many  attentions  and  unfailing  interest 
manifested  by  the  Venezuelan  officials  and  teachers  in  the  work  of  our  rep¬ 
resentatives. 

I  have  the  honor,  sir,  of  placing  in  your  hands  the  first  copy  of  the  Venezuela 
Report,  which  we  have  taken  the  liberty  of  dedicating  to  you. 

This  published  account  of  the  first  embassy  of  good  will  sent  by  an  American 
University  to  Latin  America  makes  clear  that  the  contact  was  a  valuable  one  for 
the  particular  students  who  made  the  trip,  and  that  they  bore  themselves  well 
and  creditably.  All  the  more  satisfaction  may  be  derived  from  this  fact,  inasmuch 
as  the  students  selected  might  be  fairly  taken  as  a  cross  section  of  the  student 
body  in  the  School  of  Foreign  Service, — and  you  are  already  aware  how  widely 


5 


SCHOOL  OF  FOREIGN  SERVICE 


representative  of  the  youth  of  our  country  that  student  body  is.  That  these  young 
men  should  have  made  a  favorable  impression  in  a  rather  long  trip  of  this  char¬ 
acter,  when  they  were  under  the  observation  of  a  great  number  of  persons,  and 
often  in  situations  calling  for  a  demonstration  of  no  inconsiderable  poise  and 
sense  of  the  fitness  of  things,  cannot  but  enhance  our  satisfaction  and  our  con¬ 
fidence,  not  merely  in  the  resourcefulness,  but  in  the  trustworthiness  of  the 
men  upon  whom  this  country  must  depend  in  the  future  for  the  promotion  of 
her  trade  and  the  dignified  and  active  representation  of  her  policies. 

The  opportunity  to  hear  such  eminent  Venezuelan  Professors  as  Dr.  Itriago 
Chacin,  Professor  of  International  Law  and  Head  of  the  Diplomatic  Service  of 
the  Government,  and  Dr.  Jose  Santiago  Rodriguez,  Director  of  the  School  of 
Political  Science,  who  graces  this  occasion  with  his  presence  tonight,  shows 
how  profitable  and  enlightening  must  be  the  studies  in  the  field  of  political 
science  carried  on  by  students  sent  out  in  groups  under  conditions  described  in 
this  report.  Studies  in  the  domain  of  Political  Science  are  not,  to  be  sure,  the 
primary  object  of  students  going  abroad  to  survey  the  economic  resources,  the 
commercial  usages  and  the  facilities  for  transportation  and  distribution  of  com¬ 
modities  in  the  countries  which  they  visit.  None  the  less,  sustained  contact  with 
trained  masters  of  political  studies  may  at  times  be  possible,  and  should,  in  all 
cases,  be  availed  of  in  order  to  gain  the  valuable  experience  of  hearing  points 
of  view  on  matters  of  international  policy  developed  in  other  countries  and  under 
conditions  quite  different  from  those  obtaining  at  home. 

Likewise,  to  Dr.  Manuel  Segundo  Sanchez,  the  scholarly  Director  of  the 
National  Library,  who  did  all  in  his  power  to  promote  the  studies  of  our  students, 
the  University  owes  a  debt  of  gratitude  and  herewith  publicly  thanks  the  Doctor 
for  his  many  courtesies. 

Dr.  Sherwell  in  his  individual  report  has  referred  to  the  bestowal  of  a 
decoration  on  him  by  the  Venezuelan  Government,  and  has  minimized  its  personal 
significance.  This  reservation  of  his  I  transmit  with  amendments,  for  I  cannot 
but  share  the  views  of  the  Venezuelan  authorities  in  granting  him  first,  the  Medal 
of  Public  Instruction  and  later  the  Order  of  the  Liberator,  that  he  had  rendered 
Venezuela  a  lasting  service,  no  less  than  his  own  country,  by  his  dignified, 
gracious  and  enthusiastic  interest  in  the  promotion  of  the  intellectual  and  com¬ 
mercial  relations  of  the  two  republics. 

Again,  sir,  you  are  thrice  welcome  to  these  halls  of  learning  and  to  the  long 
list  of  distinguished  Alumni,  whom  Alma  Mater  has  honored  with  the  highest 
degree  in  her  bestowal.  You  come  to  add  your  name  to  a  long  and  honored  list 
of  Latin  Americans  who  have  found  inspiration  within  these  halls,  a  list  begun 
as  far  back  as  1801,  when,  just  after  the  inauguration  of  that  Pioneer  of  Pan- 


6 


ESTEBAN  GIL  BORGES 


Americanism,  Thomas  Jefferson,  twenty-three  young  Cubans  were  brought 
here  by  Bishop  Claget,  of  Louisville,  Kentucky.  On  our  rolls  may  be  read  the 
names  of  a  President  of  Chile,  the  elder  Errazuriz;  a  distinguished  Peruvian 
Cabinet  Minister,  whose  picture  adorns  the  hall  below  stairs,  Felix  Cipriano 
Coronel  Zegarra;  and  the  high-minded  Colombian  Diplomat,  Thomas  Herran. 
And,  as  John  Carroll,  the  founder  of  Georgetown  University,  with  his  kinsman, 
Charles  Carroll  of  Carrollton,  the  signer  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  was 
one  of  the  leaders  in  the  movement  of  American  Independence  in  1775,  so,  it  is 
a  matter  of  historical  record  that  one  of  the  first  agitators  for  South  American 
Independence  was  a  brother  Jesuit,  Juan  Pablo  Vizcardo  y  Guzman,  who,  in 
1791,  at  considerable  peril,  wrote  a  famous  letter,  in  which  he  said: 

“The  valor  with  which  the  English  colonies  of  America  have  fought 
for  their  liberty,  which  they,  gloriously  enjoy,  covers  our  indolence  with 
shame;  zue  have  yielded  to  them  the  palm  with  which  they  have  been 
the  first  to  crown  the  New  World  by  their  sovereign  independence.” 

In  1798,  Guzman  died  in  London,  entrusting  to  the  United  States  Minister 
there,  Rufus  King,  a  remarkable  document  urging  South  American  independence, 
in  which  he  said  of  his  countrymen:  “The  recent  acquisition  of  independence  by 
their  neighbors  in\  North  America  has)  made  the  deepest  impression  on  them.” 

And  as  the  students  of  Georgetown  University  and  the  students  of  Venezuela 
clasped  hands  at  the  foot  of  the  statue  of  Bolivar  in  your  Capital  City  of  Caracas, 
so  do  we  extend  anew  the  hand  of  fellowship  in  our  Capital  City,  on  the  shores 
of  the  Potomac,  within  short  distance  of  the  tomb  of  Washington.  In  extending 
this  hearty  welcome  and  in  renewing  these  pledges  of  brotherhood  to  you,  sir, 
and  to  all  our  fellow-citizens  of  the  Americas,  it  is  with  the  fervent  prayer  that 
the  friendship  of  our  institutions  of  learning  may  endure  and  be  as  profound  as 
was  the  love  of  the  two  liberators,  Washington  and  Bolivar,  for  the  whole 
American  continent  and  as  sincere  as  is  the  friendship  which  exists  between  the 
United  States  of  North  America  and  the  United  States  of  Venezuela.  Americans 
all,  our  spirits  thrill  in  unison  to  that  vibrant  note,  America,  that  one  word  which 
fills  the  heart  with, — I  know  not  how  to  describe  it, — that  sudden,  magic  com¬ 
bination  of  love,  jealousy,  pride,  devotion  and  confidence,  which  men  call  Patri¬ 
otism!  Assuredly,  sirs,  there  is  no  stronger  bond  among  men  than  the  pure  love 
of  liberty  and  truth  symbolized  by  yonder  entwined  banners.  In  this  common 
devotion,  national  differences  are  forgotten  and  party  strife  ceases.  When  Truth 
and  Liberty  speak,  all  else  is  silent. 


7 


SCHOOL  OF  FOREIGN  SERVICE 


ADDRESS  BY  THE  PRESIDENT  OF  THE  UNIVERSITY 

Rev.  John  B.  CrEEden,  S.J. 

Mr.  Secretary,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen: 

^HE  story  of  the  visit  of  our  students  to  Venezuela,  the  cordial 
welcome  given  them  and  their  enthusiasm  for  the  country  and 
its  people,  forms  one  of  the  most  gratifying  chapters  in  the 
history  of  Georgetown  University.  When  the  School  of  Foreign 
Service  was  organized  it  took  for  its  motto  “Pro  patria  per  orbis 
concordium’' — to  serve  our  country  by  promoting  harmony 
among  the  Nations.  We  recognized  the  necessity  of  careful  training  in  languages, 
and  in  economic  and  political  sciences.  We  succeeded  in  securing  the  co-operation 
of  a  faculty  that  has  no  superior  in  technical  knowledge,  and  is  unequalled  in 
self-sacriticing  devotedness  to  the  aims  of  the  School,  but  the  University  from 
the  very  first  realized  that  a  knowledge  of  languages,  of  economic,  and  of  political 
science,  will  not  make  a  man  a  great  diplomat  nor  a  successful  foreign  trader. 

Eighty  years  ago  a  prospectus  of  Georgetown  College  emphasized  the  im¬ 
portance  of  cultivating  friendly  relations  with  the  new  Spanish  American  Repub¬ 
lics.  True  to  the  motto,  “Pro  Patria  per  orbis  concordiam,”  the  University  saw 
then,  as  she  sees  now,  that  it  is  better  to  know  the  psychology  of  a  people  than 
to  know  the  mileage  of  its  railroads ;  that  to  deal  understandingly,  sympathetically, 
and  harmoniously  with  another  nation  we  must  know  its  history,  its  traditions, 
and  its  culture.  Centuries  ago  the  cultured  Greeks  designated  all  who  spoke  a 
foreign  language  as  “Barbarians.”  They  despised  all  foreigners  because  they 
could  not  speak  their  language.  If  we  North  Americans  have  followed  the  Greeks 
in  nothing  else,  we  have  imitated  them  faithfully  in  our  tendency  to  belittle  those 
who  have  been  deprived  of  the  great  blessing  of  learning  the  English  language 
in  childhood.  We  have  substituted  other  epithets,  not  always  flattering,  for  the 
“Barbarian”  of  the  Greeks.  It  is  perhaps  unfair  to  judge  us  harshly  for  this 
attitude  toward  foreigners.  Every  year  there  are  cast  upon  our  shores  hundreds 
of  thousands  of  the  lower  classes  from  all  the  nations  of  the  earth.  It  is  from 
these  immigrants  that  the  ordinary,  untraveled  North  American  must  derive  his 
concept  of  foreigners.  He  had  no  opportunity  of  knowing  the  history,  the  culture, 
the  home  life,  of  the  mother  country.  Such  an  attitude  toward  foreigners  is  bom 
not  of  malice,  but  of  ignorance.  This  is  true  especially  of  our  attitude  toward 
the  people  of  Latin  American  countries.  Much  of  our  information  about  Latin 
America  and  its  people  comes  from  poisoned  sources.  Our  country  is  supplied 
with  reports  of  authors  whose  industry  is  at  least  equalled  by  their  prejudice. 
They  go  to  South  America  expecting  to  find  the  people  worshiping  the  sun. 


8 


ESTEBAN  GIL  BORGES 


They  meet  men  and  women  who  make  religion  a  vital  force  in  their  daily  lives. 
As  in  all  other  countries,  some  may  not  practise  religion,  but  they  are  all  ready 
to  die  for  it.  Unfortunately  the  reports  sent  by  these  missionaries  are  inspired 
by  disappointment  and  prejudice  rather  than  by  facts,  and  it  is  from  these  reports 
that  hundreds  of  thousands  of  North  Americans  get  their  information  about  the 
Republics  of  the  South.  Today  no  self-respecting  historian  dares  to  quote  Pres¬ 
cott  or  Irving  as  authorities.  They  were  fascinating  writers  of  romance,  but 
they  were  not  historians.  And  yet  our  histories,  our  romances,  and  our  books  of 
travel,  have  been  inspired  and  colored  by  the  fiction  of  these  authors.  Ask  any 
American  school  child  what  he  thinks  of  the  early  explorers  of  Central  and  South 
America,  and  he  will  tell  you,  with  as  much  assurance  as  he  would  declare  that 
two  and  two  make  four,  that  the  early  colonizers  of  the  southern  part  of  this 
continent  were  men  of  blood,  cruel  to  the  Indians,  and  unprogressive  in  the  arts 
of  civilization. 

The  facts  of  history  are  that  the  Spanish  colonizers  and  their  successors 
were  remarkable  for  the  humane  and  progressive  spirit  which  marked  them 
from  first  to  last.  Compared  with  the  colonizers  of  North  America  they  were 
angels  of  mercy.  Where  the  English  colonists  civilized  one  of  the  aborigines, 
the  Spanish  colonists  civilized  thousands.  It  will  surprise  the  readers  of  Prescott 
to  know  that  more  Indians  were  killed  in  the  English  conquest  of  Virginia  than 
in  the  Spanish  conquest  of  Peru;  and  that  the  massacre  of  King  Phillip  and  his 
men  in  New  England  was  more  bloody  and  less  justifiable  than  the  so-called 
massacre  by  Cortez  in  Mexico.  In  spite  of  our  boast  of  progressiveness  in  edu¬ 
cation,  three  universities  in  Spanish  America  were  almost  ready  for  their  cen¬ 
tennial  celebration  when  our  oldest  university  was  founded.  Schools  for  Indians 
were  established  in  1534;  books  for  the  Indians  in  twelve  different  dialects  were 
printed  in  Spanish  and  Portuguese  America  before  the  first  printing  press  had 
been  set  up  in  English  America.  Thanks  to  the  new  school  of  American  history, 
we  are  coming  to  know  and  appreciate  the  truth, — a  truth  that  every  American 
who  is  a  lover  of  fair  play,  will  be  glad  to  know.  Thanks  to  men  like  Bandelier 
and  Lummis,  the  omissions,  the  distortions,  the  prejudices  and  exaggerations  of 
Prescott  and  Irving  will  no  longer  mislead  the  writers  of  American  textbooks.  It 
was  to  give  our  young  men  an  opportunity  to  know  and  appreciate  the  people  of 
other  countries  that  we  adopted  the  practical  policy  referred  to  by  the  Regent 
of  the  School  of  Foreign  Service.  How  successful  our  first  experiment  has  been 
may  be  learned  from  the  report  of  the  Regent,  from  the  pages  of  the  book  just 
placed  in  the  hands  of  our  distinguished  guest,  and  from  the  love  and  appreciation 
of  Venezuela  and  its  people  that  has  taken  possession  of  the  students  of  the 
School  of  Foreign  Service.  It  is  our  purpose  to  continue  this  broad  education. 
We  want  our  students  to  come  in  contact  with  the  people  of  other  nations,  for 


9 


SCHOOL  OF  FOREIGN  SERVICE 


by  this  contact  they  will  learn  to  be  guided  in  their  estimation  of  others  by  culture 
and  manhood,  rather  than  by  language  and  nationality.  They  will  learn  that 
culture  and  manhood  are  not  confined  to  the  dwellers  of  one  land,  nor  to  the 
speakers  of  one  tongue.  They  are  to  be  found  everywhere.  When  our  education 
is  broad  enough  to  enable  us  to  disregard  accidents  and  provincialisms,  we  see 
that  human  nature  is  fundamentally  the  same  in  all  lands,  and  we  give  up  the 
Greek  habit  of  calling  a  man  a  “Barbarian”  if  he  speaks  a  language  with  which 
we  are  unfamiliar. 

There  is  a  peculiar  satisfaction  for  the  Faculty  of  Georgetown  University 
in  our  successful  experiment  in  a  South  American  country,  for  that  continent  is 
dear  to  us  by  the  memory  of  the  heroic  labors  of  brother  Jesuit  missionaries  and 
educators.  In  1556  Nobrega  landed  in  South  America,  and  it  is  due  in  large 
measure  to  him  and  his  successors,  men  like  Anchieta,  Claver  and  Vieyra,  that 
there  exists  between  North  and  South  America  one  of  the  most  startling  contrasts 
in  the  history  of  civilization.  In  the  North,  the  original  inhabitants  have  been 
practically  exterminated  without  pity.  In  the  South,  the  aborigines  are  more 
numerous  than  they  were  at  the  time  of  the  landing  of  the  first  Europeans.  These 
pioneer  missionaries  were  the  first  to  advocate  successfully  the  abolition  of  slavery. 
They  were  the  first  to  organize  schools  for  the  Indians.  They  were  the  first  to 
publish  dictionaries  and  grammars  in  the  native  dialect.  They  were  the  first  to 
set  up  and  operate  a  printing  press  on  the  Western  Continent.  They  were  the 
first  geographers  and  scientific  explorers.  They  were  the  first  to  discover  and 
use  many  valuable  medicines,  such  as  quinine.  They  were  the  first  to  bring  into 
general  use  India  rubber,  and  vanilla,  and  the  bark  of  the  chincona  tree.  In  the 
great  Reductions  of  Paraguay,  the  vanished  Acadia,  they  gave  to  the  world  an 
unparalleled  example  of  scientific  civilization.  They  were  ruined  by  the  cupidity 
of  politicians.  The  storm  of  violence  and  passion  that  so  long  frowned  upon 
them  at  last  burst  over  the  happy  abodes,  polluting  what  it  did  not  destroy.  But 
the  true  picture  of  the  Reductions  and  the  contributions  they  made  to  society  is 
given  by  the  reluctant  Raynal — a  bitter  enemy  of  the  Christian  name — “Nothing 
can  equal  the  purity  of  morals,  the  gentle  and  tender  zeal,  the  paternal  care  of 
the  Jesuits  of  Paraguay.  There  each  pastor  v/as  truly  the  father  and  guide  of 
his  flock.  There  authority  was  not  felt,  because  no  order  was  given,  no  prohi¬ 
bition  imposed,  no  punishment  inflicted,  but  what  was  ordered,  imposed,  or 
inflicted  by  religion,  which  they  loved  like  themselves  ...  A  government 
under  which  no  one  was  idle,  no  one  oppressed  with  labor ;  in  which  the  food 
was  wholesome,  abundant  and  alike  for  all  the  citizens,  where  all  were  comfortably 
lodged  and  well  clothed;  where  the  old  and  infirm,  orphans  and  widows  were 
taken  care  of  as  in  no  other  country ;  where  all  marriages  were  made  for  affection 
and  without  interest;  where  a  multitude  of  children  was  a  consolation  instead  of 
a  burden  to  parents.” 


10 


ESTEBAN  GIL  BORGES 


Having  in  mind  the  broad  aim  of  the  Foreign  Service  School  “Pro  patria 
per  orbis  concordiam"  and  filled  with  the  memory  of  the  gigantic  labors  of  brother 
Jesuits  in  South  America,  it  is  with  feelings  of  gratification  that  we  welcome  to 
the  halls  of  Georgetown  a  distinguished  representative  of  the  South  American 
Continent.  In  conferring  upon  him  the  highest  honors  of  the  University,  we  are 
giving  public  testimony  to  our  appreciation  of  his  scholarship  and  of  the  contri¬ 
butions  he  has  made  to  the  science  of  international  law,  but  we  intend  also  that 
this  ceremony  should  be  an  outward  expression  of  the  aim  and  desire  of  the 
University  to  join  together  the  men  of  all  nations  with  the  harmonious  bond  of 
charity  in  the  Brotherhood  of  Man  under  the  Fatherhood  of  God. 


Following  the  address  of  President  Creeden,  a  portion  of  the  charter  granted 
by  Congress  to  Georgetown  was  read  by  the  Dean  of  the  College  Department, 
the  Reverend  W.  Coleman  Nevils,  S.J.,  who  likewise  read  the  text  of  the  encom¬ 
ium  conferring  the  Doctorate  on  Senor  Gil  Borges ; 


“AN  ACT 

“Concerning  the  College  of  Georgetown  in  the  District  of 

Columbia  ; 

“Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the 
United  States  of  America  in  Congress  assembled,  That  it  shall  and  may 
be  lawful  for  such  persons  as  now  are,  or  from  time  to  time  may  be, 
the  President  and  Directors  of  the  College  of  Georgetown,  within  the 
District  of  Columbia,  to  admit  any  of  the  students  belonging  to  said 
College,  or  other  persons  meriting  academical  honors,  to  any  degree  in 
the  faculties,  arts,  sciences,  and  liberal  professions,  to  which  persons 
are  usually  admitted  in  other  Colleges  or  Universities  of  the  United 
States ;  and  to  issue  in  an  appropriate  form  the  diplomas  or  certificates 
which  may  be  requisite  to  testify  to  the  admission  to  such  degree. 

“Langdon  Cheves, 

“Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives. 

“John  Gaillard, 

“President  pro  tempore  of  the  Senate. 

“March  1,  1815.  Approved: 

“James  Madison.” 


11 


SCHOOL  OF  FOREIGN  SERVICE 


THE  PRESIDENT  AND  FACULTY 
OF 

GEORGETOWN  COLLEGE 

EXTEND  TO  ALL  WHO  SHALL  BEHOLD  THIS  DOCUMENT 
GREETINGS  IN  THE  LORD. 


This  ancient  University  of  Georgetown,  while  ever  devoting  itself  to  the 
advancement  of  science  and  the  liberal  arts,  has  likewise  sought  to  promote  every 
worthy  cause  tending  either  to  the  nation’s  good  or  to  the  common  welfare  of 
humanity.  Among  such  ideals  is  international  harmony,  for  no  man  can  deny 
that  the  hope  of  mankind  rests  more  and  more  on  the  cultivation  of  mutual  con¬ 
fidence  and  good  will  among  nations.  Assuredly,  such  essential  faith  in  each 
other’s  integrity  and  a  spirit  of  mutual  helpfulness  has  long  characterized  the 
relations  existing  between  Venezuela  and  the  United  States  of  North  America. 
The  chronicles  of  both  nations  furnish  ample  proof  of  this, — if  indeed  proof  be 
needed, — in  the  long  line  of  amicable  treaties  constantly  renewed,  in  the  memorable 
and  unequivocal  protest  made  by  this  Government  against  the  encroachments  of 
a  European  power  on  Venezuelan  territory  and  in  the  acts  of  gracious  kindness 
and  unfailing  courtesy  with  which  the  citizenry  of  Caracas  welcomed  our  sons, 
the  American  students  from  Georgetown,  in  the  Summer  of  1920.  And  the  latest 
token  of  fraternal  union  stands  in  imperishable  bronze  as  the  gift  of  Venezuela 
to  the  great  metropolis  of  the  North, — the  heroic  statue  of  the  renowned  Liberator, 
Bolivar. 

Motives  such  as  these  commend  the  whole  Venezuelan  people  to  our  esteem 
and  affection,  but  especially  does  this  University  deem  it  proper  to  honor  him 
whom  his  people  have  chosen  to  honor  by  sending  him  hither  as  their  special 
representative,  and  who  is  at  home  their  particular  pride  and  abroad  their  public 
ornament, — the  Honorable  Esteban  Gil  Borges.  Not  only  has  this  man’s  achieve¬ 
ments  in  fulfilling  worthily  the  responsible  post  of  Minister  of  Foreign  Relations 
raised  him  to  preeminence  among  his  fellow  Venezuelans,  but  personal  merit, 
manifesting  itself  in  the  winning  of  academic  honors  in  his  native  land,  in  the 
authorship  of  scholarly  works  on  Jurisprudence  and  in  the  high  distinction  of 
professing  International  Law,  has  won  for  him  a  renown  not  confined  to  South 
America,  but  extending  to  our  northern  lands,  and  even  to  the  shores  of  Europe. 


12 


ESTEBAN  GIL  BORGES 


Wherefore,  in  virtue  of  the  power  conferred  on  us,  the  President  and 
Directors  of  Georgetown  College  by  the  Federal  Government  of  these  United 
States,  we  hereby  create  and  proclaim  the  aforesaid  Esteban  Gil  Borges, 

DOCTOR  OF  LAWS 

with  all  the  rights,  privileges  and  emoluments  attaching  to  such  a  degree.  In 
order,  moreover,  that  these  rights  be  secured  and  safeguarded  unto  him,  we 
hereby  deliver,  with  congratulations,  these  letters  patent,  signed  by  our  own 
hand  and  fortified  with  the  great  seal  of  the  corporation,  on  this  26th  day  of 
April,  in  the  Year  of  Our  Salvation,  One  Thousand  Nine  Hundred  and  Twenty- 
One. 

PRAESES  ET  PROFESSORES 
CONLEGII  GEORGIOPOLITANI 
OMNIBUS  PRAESENTES  LITERAS  VISURIS 
SALUTEM  IN  DOMINO. 

Consuevit  quidem  haec  Universitas  Georgiopolitana  non  tantum  cultum 
scientiae  et  artium  liberalium  omni  modo  promovere,  sed  etiam,  quod  maximi 
moment!  est,  ea  omnia  quae  vel  ad  bonum  Reipublicae  vel  ad  bonum  commune 
omnium  hominum  conferant  diligentissime  excolere.  Quis  vero  negabit  bonum 
totius  generis  human!  eatenus  provehi  quatenus  inter  nationes  fides  simplex  ac 
benevolentia  sincera  existant  atque  vigeant.  Praeterea  nemo  est  qui  negare 
audeat  inter  rempublicam  Venezuelae  et  rempublicam  horum  Statuum  Foedera- 
torum  amicitiam  integerrimam  et  plenissimam  vigere  et  foveri.  Ut  alia  praeclara 
omittamus,  testis  est  ilia  incredibilis  comitas  qua  nuper  cives  Venezuelenses 
exceperunt  illos  juvenes  Americanos  qui  e  schola  nostra  ad  res  mercatorias  in 
austral!  America  visendas  explorandasque  perrexerunt;  testis  quoque  est  ilia 
statua  splendidissima  celeberrimi  Bolivaris,  australis  Americae  Liberatoris,  quam 
paucis  abhinc  diebus  huic  reipublicae  dono  dedit  populus  Venezuelanus.  Quibus 
omnibus  prae  oculis  habitis  dignissimum  videtur  ut  haecce  Universitas  Georgio¬ 
politana,  dum  grato  animo  recognoscit  virtutes  et  merita  praeclarissimorum  civium 
Venezuelensium,  Stephana  Aegidio  Borgesio,  qui  est  lumen  et  decus  Reipublicae 
Venezuelae,  quique  hac  festivitate  a  suis  civibus  ad  populum  Americanum  nuntius 
egregius  est  electus  et  constitutus,  laudes  agamus  et  praemia  decernamus.  Quod 
revera  eo  magis  est  praestandum  quod  Stephanus  Aegidius  Borgesius  in  sua 
patria  gradu  Doctoris  Philosophiae  est  insignitus,  libros  sapientia  ac  doctrina 
refertos  scripsit,  suis  concivibus  vera  principia  de  Lege  International!  tradit, 
curam  gerit  de  rebus  apud  gentes  exteras,  immo  tabs  est  qualem  optimus  quisque 
turn  in  Europa  turn  in  America,  septentrional!  et  austral!,  consuetudine  devinctum 
tenet  laudibusque  ad  astra  evehit. 


13 


SCHOOL  OF  FOREIGN  SERVICE 


Quapropter  Nos,  Moderator  et  Professores  Universitatis  Georgiopolitanae, 
auctoritate  a  summa  potestate  civili  nobis  collata,  hunc  eumdem  STEPHANUM 
AEGIDIUM  BORGESIUM,  Doctorem  Legum,  honoris  causa,  creamus  atque 
declaramus  cum  omnibus  juribus  et  privilegiis  huic  gradui  annexis.  Ut  autem 
haec  jura  ei  sarta  tectaque  sint  et  in  suo  robore  semper  permaneant  documentum 
manu  nostra  subscriptum  et  sigillo  Universitatis  munitum  eidem  Stephana  Aegidio 
Borgesio  plaudentes  tradimus. 

Die  septimo  ante  Kalendas  Maias  anno  Salutis  MDCCCCXXI. 


At  the  conclusion  of  Dean  Nevil’s  address.  President  Creeden  handed  the 
diploma  to  Dr.  Borges  and  placed  the  Doctor’s  hood  of  blue  and  gray  on  the 
shoulders  of  the  distinguished  Venezuelan,  thus  creating  him  Doctor  of  Laws. 
While  his  colleagues  were  crowding  around  Dr.  Borges  with  congratulations,  the 
students  of  the  University  broke  into  the  old,  familiar  song,  “Sons  of  George¬ 
town,”  and  this  salutation  to  the  newest  alumnus  of  the  college  was  followed  by 
the  stirring  national  anthem  of  Venezuela  played  by  the  Marine  Band  Orchestra. 

REPLY  OF 

HIS  EXCELLENCY  ESTEBAN  GIL  BORGES 

Minister  of  Foreign  Relations  of  ihe  United  States  of  Venezuela 
Reverend  Rector  and  Regent  of  the  School  of  Foreign  Service: 

Gentlemen: 

CgT  WAS  but  yesterday  that  the  city  of  New  York  conferred  on 
us  its  freedom,  and  now  today  you  favor  us  with  your  hospi¬ 
tality,  and  confer  on  us  academic  distinctions  in  these  venerable 
halls.  Kindness  thus  doubly  bestowed  binds  our  hearts  and 
spirits  forever  to  yours.  In  a  moment  of  generous  feeling, — a 
moment  we  shall  never  forget, — you  have  disclosed  to  our  very 
souls  your  own  greatness  and  your  goodness.  From  the  United  States  we  shall 
take  home  with  us  the  memory  of  your  cities  streaming  with  our  national  colors, 
and  from  the  other  shore  of  the  Caribbean  our  tri-colored  iris  will  wave  in 
eternal  salute  to  your  native  land  and  toward  the  stars  in  your  flag,  thus  signifying 
the  closer  approach  of  our  two  countries  to  a  common  destiny. 

In  your  kindness,  you  will  understand  my  feelings,  if,  in  undertaking  to 
express  my  thanks,  I  am  unable  to  find  an  appropriate  garland  of  thought  to 
exchange  for  the  laurels  you  have  bestowed  on  me ;  but  my  soul  is  as  contemplative 
in  this  University  as  in  a  temple,  and  my  gratitude  rises  like  incense  to  ask  of 
God  that  He  preserve  for  your  people  the  national  virtues  which  have  made  the 


14 


ESTEBAN  GIL  BORGES 


greatness  of  this  American  Fatherland,  for  which  we  have  an  admiration  equal 
to  our  affection ;  and  that  He  may  preserve  and  encourage  those  institutions, 
which,  like  your  University,  constitute  the  grace  of  your  manhood,  and  are  like 
the  flower  of  the  oak, — but  of  an  oak  stronger,  greater,  and  more  productive  than 
that  of  imperial  Rome,  an  oak  which  has  already  refreshed  the  world  with  the 
shade  of  peace,  no  less  than  it  has  dazzled  it  by  the  glory  of  its  foliage. 

Ladies  and  Gentlemen: 

In  international  private  law  there  is  evolving  a  national  tendency  which  has 
had  a  rather  full  theoretical  development  in  these  recent  years,  particularly  in 
Germany  and  in  Italy.  It  is,  perhaps,  the  prevailing  doctrine  in  the  English 
speaking  countries. 

This  tendency  is  not  an  exceptional  fact  in  international  private  law,  but  is 
common  in  the  evolution  of  all  systems  of  law.  International  private  law  tends 
to  become  a  law  of  the  state  just  as  in  other  times  private  law  was  the  law  of  the 
race,  in  the  case  of  the  barbarian  peoples,  and  was  the  law  of  the  city  in  the 
Greek  and  Latin  forms  of  society,  and  the  law  of  the  land  in  the  period  of  feudal 
social  organization. 

At  certain  moments  in  the  course  of  history  the  juridical  ideals  of  mankind, 
as  it  exists  in  one  or  another  group,  are  so  energetically  expressed  that  they  take 
on  the  form  of  a  legal  system  exclusive  in  character.  Progress  has  lengthened 
the  radius  of  this  orbit  from  the  ethnic  unit  to  the  city,  from  the  city  to  the 
province,  from  the  province  to  the  nation.  In  Rome  this  exclusive  character  of 
the  law  dominates  the  Law  of  the  Quirites.  The  law  of  the  feudal  period,  in 
its  turn,  was  as  exclusive  in  nature  as  the  Roman  law  of  the  early  times.  The 
doctrine  of  territorial  sovereignty,  absolute  in  character,  was  exclusive  in  a 
way  analogous  to  that  which  had  marked  the  effect  of  the  Law  of  the  Quirites 
on  Roman  institutions.  In  Rome,  there  was  the  exclusiveness  of  the  city  as 
against  all  that  lay  without,  while  within  the  city  there  was  the  exclusiveness  of 
the  patrician  class  as  against  the  plebeian  class.  In  the  middle  ages,  the  attitude 
of  exclusion  was  that  the  feudal  estate  on  the  one  hand  as  against  all  that  lay 
outside,  while  within  the  unit  of  sovereignty  the  law  of  the  lord  was  exclusive 
as  against  that  of  the  vassal. 

Civil  law  was,  in  the  cities  of  Greece  and  Rome,  the  element  which  fused 
the  antagonistic  interests  of  classes  and  castes  into  a  social  unit  more  embracing 
than  that  of  the  tyrannies,  despotic  monarchies  and  military  oligarchies  of  the 
Orient.  The  national  law  in  modern  times  was,  in  turn,  the  element  which  fused 
into  a  still  more  inclusive  unity, — that  of  the  State, — the  antagonistic  interests  of 
the  provinces  as  they  had  existed  during  the  feudal  period. 

In  Rome  the  city  limit  was  the  frontier  of  law.  The  law  was  the  child  of 


15 


SCHOOL  OF  FOREIGN  SERVICE 


the  city.  The  foreigner  was  the  enemy.  The  city  was  juridically  a  community 
isolated  within  its  hills. 

In  the  society  of  the  middle  ages  there  was,  as  in  Rome,  a  certain  antagonism 
operating  within  each  social  group.  The  feudal  castle  and  medieval  town  are 
as  hostile  to  each  other  as  had  been  the  patrician  and  plebeian  classes  in  Rome, 
but  over  and  above  this  hostility  prevails  the  hostility  against  the  foreigner.  The 
doctrine  of  territorial  sovereignty  is,  as  we  have  said,  the  Law  of  the  Quirites, 
translated  into  terms  of  feudal  law. 

Periods  of  time,  often  centuries  long,  were  necessary  in  order  that  progress 
should  break  down  these  boundaries  limiting  the  effect  of  law  set  up  by  the  caste, 
the  race,  the  city,  and  the  feudal  estate,  in  turn.  In  Rome,  the  political  work 
of  the  Empire,  the  philosophical  contribution  of  Stoicism,  the  spiritual  reform  of 
Christianity,  were  necessary  to  bring  about  the  transformation  of  the  Law  of  the 
City  into  the  Law  of  Nations.  In  our  modern  times,  the  political  achievement 
of  monarchy,  the  philosophical  influence  of  the  Natural  Law  School  and  the 
grinding  process  of  revolution  were  all  required  to  change  the  law  of  the  province 
into  the  law  of  the  nation. 

The  social  forces  which  transformed  the  categories  of  human  society  like¬ 
wise  transformed  its  law.  Rome  experienced  a  profound  modification  in  its 
legal  ideas  when  those  social  forces  made  of  the  City  of  Quirites  the  Republic 
of  the  Praetors  and  Tribunes,  and  then,  later,  transformed  the  Republic  into  a 
cosmopolitan  empire. 

Legal  categories  have  suffered  a  like  transformation  at  the  beginning  of  our 
modem  period.  Analogous  to  the  reaction  against  the  principles  of  feudal  society 
is  the  reaction  in  law,  particularly  in  the  field  of  international  private  law.  One 
of  the  manifestations  of  this  reaction  was  that  of  the  theory  of  statutes.  The 
glossators  who  formulated  the  statutory  theory  were  the  heirs  of  Latin  tradition. 

The  legal  theories  of  Italy  were  the  children  of  Roman  cosmopolitanism. 

Legal  ideas  and  influences  have  roots  not  only  in  the  loose  surface  earth  of 
theories,  but  they  also  have  roots  deep  in  the  historic  sub  soil  of  the  Western 
races.  These  ideas  and  instincts  are  the  result  of  an  historic  evolution  which  has 
at  times  lasted  centuries.  In  the  middle  ages  we  have  seen  the  countries  of  the 
Roman  Law  develop  in  the  direction  of  the  personality  of  law,  while  those  which 
lay  outside  the  influence  of  Latin  civilization  developed  rather  towards  the  terri¬ 
torial  concept  of  law.  Later,  we  have  seen  two  other  elements  in  conflict ;  on  the 
one  hand,  the  legal  customs  of  feudalism,  and  on  the  other,  what  was  left  of  the 
legal  system  of  the  invaders.  The  fundamental  principle  of  the  one  was  terri¬ 
torial  sovereignty,,  while  the  key  of  the  other  was  the  law  of  the  race.  The  two 
principles  carried  on  a  long  struggle,  and  historical  conditions  determined  the 
victory  in  each  instance. 


16 


ESTEBAN  GIL  BORGES 


France  and  Germany  were  feudal  countries  and  they  were  controlled  by  the 
system  of  territorial  sovereignty.  Italy  was  a  country  of  small  republics,  organized 
municipally  and  saturated  with  Latin  traditions ;  and  Italy  was  dominated  by  the 
theory  of  the  glossators.  Roman  law  and  local  customary  law  were  locked  in  this 
great  struggle.  The  institutions  of  society  swung  now  towards  the  imperial  idea, 
that  is,  the  idea  fundamentally  Roman,  and  now  towards  the  feudal  idea,  funda¬ 
mentally  the  product  of  the  individualistic  spirit  of  the  Germanic  Race.  The 
systems  of  international  private  law  survive  all  the  incidents  of  this  mighty 
struggle,  from  which,  as  a  sort  of  compromise  formula,  there  emerged  the  statu¬ 
tory  theory.  But  this  harmonizing  formula  had  still  further  to  adjust  itself  to 
the  social  conditions  of  the  nations,  and  from  it  there  arose  in  turn  systems  so 
different  in  character  as  that  of  the  Italian  jurists  of  the  thirteenth  century,  that 
of  the  French  jurists  of  the  sixteenth  century,  and  that  of  the  Dutch  jurists  of 
the  seventeenth  century.  The  doctrine  of  Bartolo  is  altogether  different  from 
the  theory  of  Dumoulin  and  D’Argentre,  and  this,  in  turn,  differs  from  those 
of  Voet  and  Huber.  In  this  connection,  Laurent  was  able  to  say,  “There  is  no 
vestige  of  the  cosmopolitanism  which  characterized  the  glossators  to  be  found 
among  the  statutory  theorists,”  and,  again,  that  “The  statutory  jurists  are  already 
French,  Belgian,  German.”  ^ 

The  reason  for  this  difference  in  interpretation  of  the  same  system  of  law 
is  to  be  found  in  the  controling  ideas  which  characterized  each  of  the  peoples, 
and  also  in  the  diversity  of  their  social  institutions.  Law  has  been  profoundly 
affected  social  conditions  and  mental  aptitudes.  In  Italy,  which  was  a  country 
primarily  municipal  in  its  social  structure  and  fundamentally  Roman  in  its 
juridical  development,  the  dominant  theory  was  that  of  the  glossators.  In  France, 
on  the  other  hand, — a  feudal  country,  the  land  of  the  coutumes, — the  prevailing 
law  was  the  law  which  ran  with  the  land,  although  there  was  discernible  an  occa¬ 
sional  tendency  towards  adoption  of  the  Italian  system.  Again,  in  the  Nether¬ 
lands  and  Belgium,  which  were  countries  of  provincial  autonomy,  the  governing 
principle  in  law  was  that  of  absolute  territoriality. 

The  transformation  of  the  doctrine  of  personality  of  law  is  another  example 
of  the  profound  modification  by  which  experience  shapes  ideas  which  may  have 
had  the  same  source,  and,  at  the  outset,  the  same  nature.  The  idea  of  the 
personality  of  law  has  in  our  modern  systems  of  law  the  same  function  which 
it  had  in  the  early  centuries  of  the  middle  ages  among  the  invaders  of  the 
Roman  Empire.  In  both  systems  of  law,  the  function  seems  to  have  been 
identical  although  the  ground  for  its  operation  seems  to  have  changed. 

Laine  and  Laurent  have  denied  that  these  two  systems  had  an  identical  origin 
and  a  dose  relationship.  “We  must  not,”  says  Laurent,  “confuse  the  personal 


^  Laurent — Dr.  civ.  int.  I — 257-258. 

17 


SCHOOL  OF  FOREIGN  SERVICE 


law  of  the  Germanic  peoples  with  the  personal  law  or  statutory  law  of  French 
legal  theory.  In  our  system,  one  law  governs  all  those  who  are  members  of  a 
single  state.  The  Code  Napoleon  governs  all  Frenchmen  whatever  may  have 
been  their  racial  origin.  Generally  speaking,  laws  are  without  authority  beyond 
the  boundaries  of  the  territory  over  which  the  legislator  exercises  jurisdiction. 
Some  laws,  however,  which  deal  with  the  status  and  capacity  of  persons  continue 
to  govern  even  Frenchmen  living  in  foreign  lands;  and  these  laws  are  called 
personal  because  they  refer  to  the  person  and  no  Frenchman  can  escape  them 
by  departing  from  his  native  land.  .  .  .  Among  the  barbarian  peoples  the 
personal  law  was  the  national  law  of  every  man.”  ^  “The  personal  laws  of  the 
French,”  remarks  Laine,  “are  nothing  else  than  their  territorial  laws  following 
them  into  foreign  countries.  Today  all  laws  which  are  called  personal  from 
the  point  of  view  of  conflict  of  laws  are  really  territorial  laws,  that  is  to  say,  they 
are  precisely  the  opposite  of  the  personal  laws  of  the  barbarian  peoples.” 

The  basis  of  the  notion  of  personality  of  law  has,  in  fact,  been  transformed. 
Among  the  barbarians  the  criterion  was  the  race,  while  in  modern  law  it  is 
territorial.  Its  function,  however,  in  our  judgment,  remains  the  same,  and  in 
one  and  the  other  case  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  it  implies  the  application  of 
a  national  law  in  a  foreign  country.  Among  the  bargarians  it  was  the  law  of 
the  tribe,  while  among  the  peoples  of  today  it  is  the  law  of  the  nation.  What 
has  changed  is  the  form  of  the  State ;  the  basis  of  law  in  the  system  of  the 
invaders  was  the  ethnic  unit,  while  in  the  modern  world  it  is  chiefly  the  geographic 
unit. 

Neither  the  personality  of  law  among  the  barbarians  nor  the  territoriality  of 
law  in  feudal  Europe,  nor  the  compromise  formulas  of  the  statutory  jurists,  nor 
again  the  personality  of  law  in  our  modem  juridical  system  can  be  conceived  as 
purely  theoretical  notions  capable  of  isolation  from  historical  realities.  These 
concepts  take  their  origin  directly  in  the  diversity  of  social  institutions,  racial 
characteristics  and  stages  of  evolution  of  the  State.  The  personality  of  law 
directly  corresponds  to  a  notion  of  a  state  resting  squarely  on  an  ethnic  unit ;  the 
“law  of  the  land”  rests,  in  turn,  on  a  concept  of  a  state  founded  on  the  basis  of 
a  geographic  unit ;  while  the  personality  of  modem  law  finds  its  basis  in  a  theory 
of  the  state  resting  on  the  principle  of  nationality. 

The  work  of  centuries  cannot  be  changed  in  a  day.  The  personality  of  law 
is  destined  long  to  remain  an  element  in  the  legal  systems  of  those  states  which 
accepted  the  Roman  law  and  the  Latin  theory  of  the  State;  the  territorial  char¬ 
acter  of  law  will  likewise  remain  imbedded  in  the  legal  systems  of  those  States 
which  adhered  to  the  Germanic  law  and  the  feudal  traditions. 

Race,  historic  environment,  ideas,  instincts,  prejudices,  political  interests. 


*  Laurent,  Dr.  civ.  int.  I — 168. 


18 


ESTEBAN  GIL  BORGES 


national  passions, — all  these  are  coefficients  with  evident  influence  on  the  for¬ 
mation  of  law  and  in  a  less  direct,  but  none  the  less  certain,  manner,  on  the 
formation  of  scientific  doctrines.  In  order  to  estimate  the  possibility  of  a  reform 
which  would  bring  about  a  uniformity  of  ideas  in  the  teaching  and  principles  of 

positive  law,  we  must  take  account  of  the  historic  factors.  Scientific  thought  by 

itself  would  create  nothing  but  abstract  concepts.  For  example,  if  we  were  to 
try  to  reconcile  the  Italian  theory  of  the  personality  of  law  and  the  territorial 
theory  which  prevails  in  the  English  speaking  world,  we  should  have  to  wipe  out 
all  the  past  of  these  peoples  and  erase  from  the  national  life  of  some,  centuries 
of  feudal  traditions,  and  from)  that  of  others,  centuries  of  Roman  traditions. 

In  international  private  law  we  find  essential  differences  between  the  coun¬ 
tries  of  the  civil  law  and  those  of  the  common  law,  and  these  differences  originate 
in  large  part  in  the  historic  development  of  these  two  systems  of  law. 

“Our  English  concept  of  the  law,”  says  Harrisson,  “preserves  us  from  the 
fantastic  sophism  which  govern  most  of  the  law  on  the  Continent;  that  is  to 

say,  the  idea  that  from  international  private  law  we  can  construct  a  universal 

system  based  on  the  meditation  of  jurists  and  imposed  by  the  force  of  their 
logical  strength  on  the  different  tribunals  of  Europe.  For  us  in  England,  notions 
of  jurisprudence  are  derived  from  practical  decisions  and  not  dogmatic  theories.”  ® 

“Systems  of  legislation,”  says  Laine,  “may  be  divided  into  two  groups;  on 
the  one  hand  the  systems  which  exist  in  France,  Italy,  and  Germany,  and  on 
the  other  the  systems  of  England  and  America.  The  first  group  has  as  its 
common  element  the  Roman  law,  which  cannot  be  found  in  the  second ;  conversely 
the  second  group  has  the  feudal  law,  which  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  first.  Conse¬ 
quently,  between  these  two  systems  of  legislation  there  is  a  profound  difference 
for  a  double  reason.” 

The  positive  law  of  the  United  States  has  been  composed  by  jurisprudence 
and  federal  legislation.  In  matters  of  international  private  law,  Anglo-American 
jurisprudence  still  clings  to  the  concepts  of  the  Dutch  jurists  of  the  eighteenth 
century.  The  doctrine  of  absolute  territorial  sovereignty  permeates  its  rigorous 
attitude  towards  the  foreigner  and  the  foreign  law. 

The  application  of  the  foreign  law  is  not  admitted,  but  it  is  tolerated  on 
the  basis  of  comity  and  as  a  matter  of  liberalism.  (“Ex  comitate” ;  “Liberaliter” ; 
V.  Comm,  ad  Pandectas  Lib.  I — T.  IV — “De  Statutis.”) 

The  theory  of  the  “Lex  Situs”  is  the  basis  of  the  international  private  law 
of  the  English  speaking  peoples.  This  theory  is  applied  to  all  juridical  relations, 
persons,  status  and  capacity,  property  and  all  its  ramifications,  contracts  and 
criminal  law. 

•'  Harrisson,  Journ.  de  Dr.  Int.  Prive,  1880,  p.  548. 


19 


SCHOOL  OF  FOREIGN  SERVICE 


“It  is  of  the  highest  importance,”  says  Minor,  “that  every  question  coming 
to  a  court  for  decision  shall  have  a  ‘situs’  some\vhere,  and,  generally  speaking, 
every  question  which  arises  will  be  settled  by  the  law  of  the  State  where  this 
‘situs’  is  located.  Whatever  interests  may  be  ventilated  before  a  tribunal,  whether 
they  have  been  created  by  the  voluntary  action  of  an  individual  or  have  an  origin 
without  his  voluntary  action  but  rather  as  a  result  of  the  operation  of  law,  such 
an  interest  must  have  its  ‘situs’  indicated  by  the  individual  or  determined  by 
the  law.  Marriage,  contract,  inheritance,  and  crime, — each  of  these  things  has 
its  ‘situs,’  and  it  is  the  law  of  the  ‘situs’  which  governs  it.  .  .  .  One  of  the 

principles  of  science  is  that  every  state  is  sovereign  within  its  own  jurisdiction. 
Consequently,  every  state  may  forbid  the  application  of  foreign  laws  within  its 
boundaries.  It  follows  that  when  effect  is  given  to  a  foreign  law  it  is  because 
temporarily  the  national  law  withholds  its  supreme  authority  in  favor  of  the 
foreign  law,  which,  for  the  moment  and  with  particular  reference  to  a  specific 
case,  is  converted  by  the  will  of  the  State  into  its  national  law.”  * 

In  the  British  Empire  the  difference  between  the  juridical  standards  of 
the  home  country  and  the  constituent  States  of  the  Empire,  and  in  the  United 
States,  the  difference  between  the  federal  and  state  laws,  has  resulted  in  a  tendency 
somewhat  similar  to  that  which  prevails  in  international  private  law ;  and  these 
differences  have  conferred  predominating  influence  on  the  theory  of  territorial 
sovereignty. 

These  differences,  profound  in  character, — which  distinguish  systems  of 
international  private  law  prevailing  on  the  European  continent  and  in  England, — 
and  the  differences  between  the  civil  law  of  the  Spanish  American  countries  and 
the  common  law  of  the  United  States  in  America,  are  to  be  attributed  less  to 
the  fondness  of  thinkers  for  this  or  that  theoretical  construction,  than  to  peculiar¬ 
ities  in  the  historical  development  of  the  respective  juridical  standards. 

After  the  dissolution  of  the  Roman  Empire,  the  variety  in  law,  based  on  the 
criterion  of  race,  persisted.  From  the  eleventh  through  the  twelfth  century,  the 
commercial  relations  and  the  renaissance  of  Roman  Law  in  the  cities  of  Italy 
modified  the  concept  of  law  in  the  units  of  civil  society  which  there  existed.  As 
Westlake  remarks,  in  the  application  of  foreign  laws,  principles  of  justice, 
determined  by  reason,  were  observed.® 

The  feudal  system  brought  to  the  Western  World  a  new  concept  of  inter¬ 
national  private  law.®  This  fact  was  the  starting  point  for  two  distinct  systems 
of  law  on  the  Continent.  According  to  one,  the  law  of  the  land  was  to  be  applied 

^  Minor  “Conflict  of  Laws,”  Boston,  1901,  p.  6. 

®  Westlake  “International  Law,”  4th  Ed.,  p.  15. 

®  Sumner  Maine,  Ancient  Law,  p.  108. 


20 


ESTEBAN  GIL  BORGES 


to  every  controversy,  while  according  to  the  other,  there  could  be  applied  to  a 
particular  case  a  foreign  juridical  principle  if  the  nature  of  the  case  so  required. 

By  reason  of  the  geographic  isolation  of  England  and  the  unity  of  its  judicial 
organization,  that  country  was  somewhat  remote  from  this  conflict  of  legal  systems. 
The  Norman  conquest  resulted  in  the  organization  of  a  strong  monarchy  and  a 
parliament  with  genuine  legislative  authority.  As  Brunner  declares,  the  Curia 
Regis  from  the  beginning  displayed  an  unaccustomed  capacity  for  centralizing  the 
legal  and  administrative  system  of  the  country.'^ 

These  elements  constituted  a  uniform  and  exclusive  system  of  territorial 
law,  a  closed  system  in  which  there  was  no  room  for  the  variety  of  points  of 
view  given  expression  by  French,  Italian,  Dutch  and  German  jurisconsults  in 
settling  conflicts  between  their  several  customary  or  statutory  systems. 

Anzilotti  puts  it  well  when  he  says :  “In  England,  the  statutory  theory  was 
late  in  coming  into  use,  and  it  was  adapted  in  such  a  way  to  the  common  law 
that  it  was  almost  transformed.  In  all  the  other  countries  on  the  Continent  the 
principles  and  conclusions  of  this  theory  were  admitted.  It  is  true  that  they  were 
regarded  from  different  and  even  opposite  points  of  view.” 

England  remained  in  this  geographic  and  legal  isolation  down  to  the  period 
of  revolution.  At  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  century  the  commercial  relations 
between  England  and  the  Continent  grew  very  much  more  close.  This  was 
particularly  the  case  between  England  and  the  Low  countries.  The  Dutch  pub¬ 
licists  of  the  school  of  Grotius,  Rodemberg,  of  the  two  Voets,  and  of  Huber, 
enjoyed  great  prestige. 

English  jurisprudence  found  its  doctrines  particularly  applicable  to  the  legal 
system  of  England,  and  as  application  of  foreign  law  was  regarded  as  a  limitation 
of  territorial  sovereignty,  this  obstacle  was  overcome  by  the  acceptance  of  the 
principle  of  comity  of  nations. 

The  comitas  gentium  is  still  in  England  and  the  United  States  the  basis  for 
the  application  of  foreign  law.  British  jurisprudence  and  that  of  the  United 
States  have  been  in  this  regard  altogether  conservative.  In  1895,  a  decision  of 
the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  declared  that  the  principle  of  reciprocity 
was  an  indispensable  requisite  for  the  carrying  out  of  foreign  decisions  for  “the 
comitas  gentium  of  the  United  States  called  for  nothing  more.”  ® 

Recently  there  has  developed  a  tendency  looking  to  the  conciliation  of  the 
two  systems  of  international  private  law  namely,  to  that  of  Europe  and  to  that 
of  the  English  speaking  countries.  The  Conference  of  the  International  Law 
Association,  at  its  meeting  in  Heidelberg  in  1911,  declared  “that  there  ought  to 

^  Brunner  and  Hastings,  Sources  of  the  Law  of  England. 

®Cf.  Beale,  Harvard  Law  Review,  23;  Wharton,  Conflicts  of  Law,  356-357; 
and  New  York  Code  of  Civil  Procedure,  Par.  1756. 


21 


SCHOOL  OF  FOREIGN  SERVICE 


be  established  an  International  Commission  with  a  view  to  recommend  mutual 
concessions  between  the  systems  of  law  of  the  continent  and  the  English  speaking 
peoples  so  as  to  bring  them  closer  to  uniformity.” 

The  difference  in  the  basis  of  international  law  between  the  countries  of 
Roman  tradition  and  those  of  feudal  traditions  are  not  as  profound  as  to  compel 
us  to  abandon  our  hope  of  reaching  a  compromise  which  will  eliminate  the 
divergencies.  National  peculiarities  which  took  shape  by  reason  of  racial  dif¬ 
ferences  are  today  of  less  influence  than  they  were  in  the  evolutionary  period 
of  law,  while  those  peculiarities  due  to  geographical  reasons  have  been  modified 
by  reason  of  the  improvement  of  communications  and  means  of  closer  contact 
between  peoples;  while,  finally,  those  due  to  differences  in  social  institutions  are 
being  gradually  wiped  out  by  reason  of  the  expansion  of  a  single  ideal  of 
civilization  which  makes  identical  the  principles  of  moral  and  juridical  life.® 

The  action  of  various  common  cultural  factors,  the  comparative  studies  of 
legislation  which  seek  amid  all  the  varieties  those  elements  which  are  common, 
and  which  always  exist  at  the  bottom  of  all  systems  of  law,  and  upon  which  there 
may  be  based  a  harmonizing  structure,  research  in  the  universal  underlying 
stratum  of  ideas  and  principles  governing  our  civil  life,  and,  above  all,  the  analogy 
of  the  interests  which  nationalities  in  this  hemisphere  have  in  their  various  jurid¬ 
ical  relations  and  particularly  in  commercial  law ; — these  factors  seem  to  justify 
our  hope  and  to  stimulate  our  effort  in  the  unification  of  the  legal  standards  of 
America. 

The  most  imperative  need  of  legislative  uniformity, — and  the  least  difficult 
to  effect, — is  to  be  found  in  the  field  of  commercial  law.  The  work  of  uniformity 
in  this  branch  meets  fewer  obstacles  than  in  the  other  branches  of  law,  as  the 
civil  or  public  law  more  immediately  and  fundamentally  follow  the  influence  of 
national  individualism  and  historical  tradition. 

Commercial  institutions  fulfill  economic  requirements  of  a  general  character; 
it  is,  therefore,  in  this  branch  of  legal  activity  that  the  task  of  making  uniform 
the  law  of  the  American  Republics  can  most  successfully  be  achieved.  This  will 
be  a  useful  accomplishment.  This  work  of  uniformity  will  not  only  be  useful  now, 
but  it  will  also  clear  the  way,  in  the  future,  for  a  more  embracing  and  more 
profound  unity  of  the  juridical  life  of  the  nations  of  this  hemisphere. 


The  President  of  the  University,  in  introducing  the  next  speaker,  said : 

“I  believe  the  greatest  force  in  the  country  today  for  the  promotion  of  har¬ 
monious  intercourse  among  nations  is  the  Pan  American  Union.  It  is  always 

®  Bertin-Journ  de  Dr.  Int.  Prive,  1892-225,  and  1898.  For  the  opposite  view, 
see  Raoul  de  la  Grasserie.  Raymond  Saleilles,  Rev.  trim,  de  Dr.  Civ. 


22 


ESTEBAN  GIL  BORGES 


ready  to  furnish  accurate  historical  knowledge  of  all  the  countries  of  America, 
and  it  is  likewise  always  ready  to  correct  false  history  concerning  those  countries. 
It  seems  that  a  man  to  be  a  successful  Director  of  that  Union  should  possess  one 
of  the  qualities  of  a  great  poet.  He  has  to  be  born  to  such  a  position,  and  cannot 
be  made.  The  Union  at  present  has  a  man  at  its  head  who  certainly  seems  to  be 
born  for  the  position.  He  has  a  wide  knowledge  of  the  American  Republics, 
a  broad  sympathy  with  their  peoples  and  a  geniality  which  is  irresistible.  It 
gives  me  great  pleasure  to  present  him  to  you  this  evening  in  the  person  of  the 
Honorable  Leo  S.  Rowe,  Doctor  of  Laws,  Director  of  the  Pan  American  Union.” 


Closing  Remarks  by  the  Honorable  Leo  S.  Rowe,  LL.D., 

Director  of  the  Pan  American  Union. 

Gentlemen  of  the  Special  Delegation  from  Venezuela,  Members  of  the  Board  of 
Regents  and  Faculties  of  Georgetown  University,  Students  of  Georgetown 
University,  Ladies  and  Gentlemen: 

One  would  be  poor  both  in  mind  and  spirit  were  he  not  to  be  stirred  by  an 
inspiring  occasion  such  as  this.  It  is  on  these  occasions  that  we  are  able  to 
measure  the  progress  that  has  been  made  for  that  closer  relationship,  not  only 
between  the  governments,  but  between  the  peoples  of  America,  which  means  so 
much  to  the  present  and  to  the  future  of  our  civilization. 

It  is,  therefore,  Mr.  Minister,  with  a  deep  sense  of  privilege  that  I  bring  to 
you  the  warm  greetings  and  congratulations  of  the  Pan  American  Union. 

We  realize  that  in  honoring  you  Georgetown  University  has  honored  itself. 
We  greet  you  as  the  representative  of  that  spirit  of  continental  co-operation  which 
both  you  and  your  country  have  done  so  much  to  develop.  Statesman,  philosopher, 
educator,  you  have  ever  held  before  your  students  and  before  the  people  of  your 
country  the  highest  standards  of  international  right  and  justice.  Beyond  the 
personal  tribute  which  this  occasion  means  to  you.  Sir,  we  desire  to  thank  you 
and  the  members  of  the  distinguished  special  mission  that  accompanies  you  for 
the  honor  you  have  done  this  country  in  paying  us  this  visit.  Your  presence 
here  means  much  to  us,  as  it  means  much  to  the  other  republics  of  the  American 
continent,  because,  aside  from  the  great  outpouring  of  national  feeling  which 
the  occasion  of  the  presentation  of  the  statue  of  the  Liberator  has  brought,  there 
is  a  significance  to  these  demonstrations  which  I  am  sure  you  will  carry  back 
with  you  to  Venezuela,  and  which  will  also  resound  to  the  utmost  confines  of 
this  continent. 


23 


SCHOOL  OF  FOREIGN  SERVICE 


The  great  national  hero  whose  memory  we  have  honored  during  the  cere¬ 
monies  of  this  last  week  stands  forth  in  the  history  of  this  continent  as  the  pioneer 
of  international  codperation,  the  first  to  appreciate  the  importance  of  unity  of 
policy  and  unity  of  effort  as  between  the  republics  of  the  American  continent,  the 
first  to  realize  how  much  such  unity  of  effort  means  to  the  peace  of  America  and 
to  the  peace  of  the  world.  Bolivar’s  call  for  the  assembly  of  the  First  Pan 
American  Congress,  which  met  in  Panama  in  1826,  indicates  his  large  vision,  his 
power  to  visualize  the  future  and  his  keen  sense  of  the  important  part  which  the 
republics  of  America  were  called  upon  to  play  in  the  history  of  modern  civilization. 
The  high  standards  which  he  set  during  the  early  years  of  the  nineteenth  century 
have  required  a  long  time  of  painful  effort  to  find  acceptance  throughout  the 
continent,  and  it  is  only  the  present  generation  that  is  beginning  to  reap  the  fruits 
of  the  great,  statesmanlike  vision  of  your  distinguished  countryman. 

And  we  congratulate  you,  Sir,  as  well  as  those  who  are  accompanying  you, 
that  it  has  been  vouchsafed  to  you  to  continue,  and  to  express  in  your  own  public 
policy  those  high  standards  and  ideals  for  which  Bolivar  stood,  for  which  he 
struggled  and  for  which  he  made  the  great  sacrifice. 

The  Pan  American  Union  greets  you.  Sir,  not  only  as  the  worthy  repre-' 
sentative  of  a  great  country,  but  as  a  staunch  promoter  of  those  ideals  of  inter¬ 
national  justice  and  fair  dealing  which  should  ever  characterize  the  relations  of 
the  republics  of  America  with  one  another  and  with  the  world  at  large. 


24 


P: 


[(» 


V.J 

l' 


V 


